Virtually every social conflict can be solved with a proper understanding of property rights. As an example, consider the frequent claims that a business has engaged in discriminatory practices.
The right to property means the freedom to create, attain, use, keep, trade, and dispose of material values. It means that the owner of a parcel of property has the freedom to choose what happens with it. If he chooses to trade it with others, he is free to do so. And he is also free to set the terms and conditions of that trade.
If he chooses to use irrational criteria, that is his moral right. If he decides that he doesn’t want to do business with blacks, gays, or people named Frank, that is his moral right. He has a moral right to decide whom he will trade with. If he chooses to discriminate based on irrational criteria, then he will suffer when more enlightened people take their business elsewhere.
Nobody claims that businesses have a right to force others to patronize their shop. Yet, consumers believe that they have a right to force businesses to sell to them. Trade should be a mutually consensual activity. If one party is forced to engage in the exchange, regardless of his judgment, then it isn’t a trade. It’s extortion.
If somebody doesn’t want to do business with me because of my skin color, my sex, or any other irrational criteria, then I don’t want to do business with him. He has a right to use his property as he deems best, but let him suffer the consequences of his irrationality.